MrSandman

I had been mulling over the choice between the D800 and the 5D3, and went with the 5D3 for a number of reasons - one of which being the fact that I like the Canon ‘design’ altogether more than Nikon’s. And then this light leak issue creeps up (which I confirmed just now on my 5D3). I’ve been hearing people saying things liked “it doesn’t matter in real-world shooting”, or “it’s easy to avoid it by just not lighting the LCD in dark environments. 1. This just isn’t true - if light is leaking in and altering the metering, you get (slightly) altered photos. This has been confirmed by many. And 2. whether most of us shoot in really dark environments or not simply doesn’t matter. We shouldn’t have to take precautionary measures when shooting photos to work around a design flaw. We as customers should not be the solution to a product’s design problem. And no matter how easy the solution is, it doesn’t change the fact that it’s a design flaw.

I remember watching The Tonight Show many years ago and during one of Jay Leno’s monologues, he said, “In other news, the FDA came out with new rules regarding fecal matter in poultry. Now folks.......this is the new rule? Shouldn’t this have been the old rule? Shouldn’t this have been rule #1??”

(....Of course, he went on to say “I sure hope this doesn’t mean Colonel Sanders is now down to only ten secret herbs and spices in his fried chicken”....but that’s beside the point.)

Similarly, a camera properly blocking out light should be rule #1. A camera is supposed to block out light....just in case we decide to shoot in extremely low light environments (which many already do). And for a fairly-dim LCD backlight to alter the metering in a dark environment is just plain scandalous. That kind of thing suggests that Canon pushed this camera out before testing it thoroughly (or maybe they knew about it and decided to ship it out anyway and hope for the best).

Either way, I’m returning mine, and will consider buying it again after Canon has satisfactorily addressed the matter. Shipping a brand-new camera back to Canon to have it modified or repaired is completely unacceptable, and utterly out of the question.

While you are certainly entitled to your reaction, and feel the need to send your 5DIII back to the factory, they'll get mine back when they pry it from my cold dead fingers. It is a fabulous camera, that I truly have enjoyed. It's much better on several fronts than my 5DII (which isn't perfect either but is a great camera). Every camera has nuances that we must deal with. If I have to worry about light leak from the LCD in dark environments, then I don't have much to worry about. I simply check the histogram as I do for virtually every shot I take. If the exposure isn't right, I compensate. There's usually a lot more reasons to have to compensate than light leak from an LCD impacting the metering by some small percentage.

For those that think this is a big deal, good on 'ya! I choose not to sweat the really small stuff...

prestonpalmer

If this is such a huge issue, why do BOTH my 5D2's have the EXACT SAME light leak problem as my new 5D3? There was never a recall on the 5d2's, and never a mention of the light leak... The problem is users who take photos with their lens hoods on...

Wow, light will enter thru the viewfinder if you take your eye away from it!

This has been known and happens in every SLR and DSLR for at least the past several years. Canon includes a eyepiece cover and tells you to use it, and Nikon has a lever that closes a shutter to block light from entering. Every DSLR does this.

Talk about a newby photographer posting his amazing discovery on vimeo, and then those who think its a new discovery and are shocked.

That's not even remotely the same issue. That's light going in a completely uncovered VF. Everyone should know about that one by now since it has been an issue approximately since the advent of in-body AE. That's why your camera came with a little plastic cover that slides onto the VF for those situations.

Logged

MrSandman

Don’t start with that Canon vs. Nikon stuff! I already said that I’ll buy the camera again when Canon fixes the issue. I truly think Canon is the better way to go, period. I still think that way and I have no intention of buying the D800.

But can’t you just admit that Canon really screwed the pooch on this one? I mean, light leaking THROUGH the LCD display and getting to the meter? And worse, the backlight for the LCD causing the same outcome?

Saying that light leaking through the camera body isn’t a problem is like saying that a small amount of water leaking into a battleship isn’t a problem either. You can take measures to cope with them, but the bottom line is that these things are not supposed to leak. Leakage through the viewfinder, yeah, I can understand that. But through the LCD panel? That’s not acceptable.

I had been mulling over the choice between the D800 and the 5D3, and went with the 5D3 for a number of reasons - one of which being the fact that I like the Canon ‘design’ altogether more than Nikon’s. And then this light leak issue creeps up (which I confirmed just now on my 5D3). I’ve been hearing people saying things liked “it doesn’t matter in real-world shooting”, or “it’s easy to avoid it by just not lighting the LCD in dark environments. 1. This just isn’t true - if light is leaking in and altering the metering, you get (slightly) altered photos. This has been confirmed by many. And 2. whether most of us shoot in really dark environments or not simply doesn’t matter. We shouldn’t have to take precautionary measures when shooting photos to work around a design flaw. We as customers should not be the solution to a product’s design problem. And no matter how easy the solution is, it doesn’t change the fact that it’s a design flaw.

I remember watching The Tonight Show many years ago and during one of Jay Leno’s monologues, he said, “In other news, the FDA came out with new rules regarding fecal matter in poultry. Now folks.......this is the new rule? Shouldn’t this have been the old rule? Shouldn’t this have been rule #1??”

(....Of course, he went on to say “I sure hope this doesn’t mean Colonel Sanders is now down to only ten secret herbs and spices in his fried chicken”....but that’s beside the point.)

Similarly, a camera properly blocking out light should be rule #1. A camera is supposed to block out light....just in case we decide to shoot in extremely low light environments (which many already do). And for a fairly-dim LCD backlight to alter the metering in a dark environment is just plain scandalous. That kind of thing suggests that Canon pushed this camera out before testing it thoroughly (or maybe they knew about it and decided to ship it out anyway and hope for the best).

Either way, I’m returning mine, and will consider buying it again after Canon has satisfactorily addressed the matter. Shipping a brand-new camera back to Canon to have it modified or repaired is completely unacceptable, and utterly out of the question.

What many has it been confirmed by? So far I have seen one person say that he found a difference with the lens cap off and it ONLY occured at EV1, the absolute bottom limit of the metering performance range, where it underexposed by 1/3 of a stop. So basically it only altered real world exposure in THE single worst case scenario and then only by 1/3 stop. Most people would be using liveview or experimenting with exposure in such conditions anyway I'd bet.

I mean maybe there is something more to it since Canon is taking it seriously, but it seems more like it is just a PR move to show that they respond quickly and without question (maybe letting demand build up again too to help sustain $3500? ) than something truly needed. But maybe there is something more that we don't know about.

I am assuming this light leak "issue" ruined many of your photos right? That you are so upset and plan to return the camera? Or are you just flipping out over everybody else making a mountain out of a mole hill?

Calm down man...

To be completely honest, the metering has been more accurate on this then any other Canon I have used in the past. Not a big deal. And guess what? Not just the 5D3 does this either, others have confirmed it has happened with past bodies as well. It's just that the 5D3 is under such a tight eye, that people are trying to find anything and everything to complain about. Go shoot some pictures for goodness sake.

Strictly speaking they have always said you should put eye piece cover on or lock exposure for such scenarios though. It looks a bit more touchy than my 5D2 but with very strong lighting in the bathroom and aiming at a dark brown cabinet I was able to induce the same 2/3 stop change on my 5D2 as I moved my eye away as well. It took a bit harsher conditions than he had since I didn't see much, 0 to 1/3 under his conditions, so it may be touchier but still they do warn on all SLRs to not do this, granted it's less a hassle the less touchy it is but it still doesn't seem like any sort of a real or new issue. I mean since the first days of modern metering this effect has been known, thus that funny little thingy on the canon neck strap or the VF curtain on 1 series or nikon bodies.

If you want to complain maybe complain that canon sticks with the annoying little neck strap thing on all non 1 series bodies.

But this is nothing new.They would have to recall every SLR/DSLR made in the last, well, who knows how many years.

I assume you mean lens caps, Preston. And while I disagree with the OP's contention that this is a *big* issue, I have to say that I find the dismissive "doesn't affect images with the lens cap off" attitude worse—if for no other reason than it is objectively wrong. If the problem doesn't affect you, then great. If you're willing to work around it, then great. But you can't argue that this isn't a design flaw that can affect images taken with this camera. This much has been proven. Even if we want to dismiss every posted example as somehow flawed, the fact that Canon has acknowledged it as an issue should tell us that much. That it has affected other Canon bodies doesn't change this (although it may explain inconsistent meter readings in certain situations with these older camera bodies). And, no, this issue doesn't mean the 5D3 isn't a great body.

Having said all that, I wonder if the big take away from this situation for many people is understanding that covering the viewfinder when your eye is not up against it does actually matter.